This is from Missy Comley Beattie's "The Radical Majority" (CounterPunch) and she's talking about the con game being played on Americans:

Getting the war bill through the Senate will be a struggle and if by some miracle, it passes, Bush will veto it, but that doesn't really matter to those who crafted it. If they wanted an end to war, they could stop the funding. Instead, they are merely attempting to placate the voters who are demanding an end to the occupation of Iraq. Congressmen and women who are up for reelection in 2008 should pay attention to their constituents. Most likely, they won't. And this is why we, the American people, need to react to the timidity of the democrats we elected in 2006 to stop the war and to the rabid Republicans and Democrats who continue their lust for military invasion. It's not radical to seek justice. Nor is it radical to demand impeachment. Both are necessary to heal our nation and to restore its reputation. For Nancy Pelosi to take impeachment off the table emphasizes her lack of leadership and underscores what an incompetent president she would be (Cindy for Congress!) if Bush and Cheney were impeached and she ascended. We need to disorderly and responsibly redeploy all members of Congress out of Washington, DC and back to wherever in search of employment not paid for by taxpayers-unless, of course, these politicians finally perform their duties to listen to the will of the people and uphold the Constitution.

Is there anyone more stupid that Laura Bush? Here's what she said this week on National Adoption Day:

Adoption is a hopeful act. It recognizes that every child has limitless potential for success, and limitless capacity for love. It's an act that's brought joy to millions of American families -- including ours. President Bush and I are the proud adoptive aunt and uncle of a niece and nephew.

Laura and the Bully Boy didn't adopt anyone. And that statement is insulting. They are the aunt and uncle of a niece and nephew. Laura's creating a second class for the family. "Look, here's our nieces and nephews and, over there, you've got our adopted niece and adopted nephew."

I celebrated Thanksgiving with my family. All our members of our family and I really don't draw the lines that the White House does.

Friday, November 23, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the mainstream press continues to issue spin, the so-called 'coalition of the willing' receives notice that one member is leaving the club, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey are US war resisters in Canada who have sought refugee status. That status was denied and Canada's Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals to that decision. Matt Mernagh (Canada's NOW magazine) reports the status on legislative efforts: the leaders of Canada's Liberal party are cowards. Instead of addressing the situation, they're attempting to buy time by scheduling a hearing. Mernagh notes that war resisters will be allowed to testify at the hearings and quotes war resister Phil McDowell declaring, "We'll give them an understanding of what we're doing here. I think we can make a great case." Dee Knight (Workers World) ties the refusal by the Canadian Supreme Court with other recent actions and decisions and notes, "In the U.S., the organization Courage to Resist has organized a letter-writing campaign to Canadian government officials. The letter asks them "to make a provisionfor sanctuary" for U.S. war resisters, and cites Vietnam-era Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's statement that "Canada should be a refuge from militarism." (To sign, go to Courage to Resist.)"

The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

On Thursday, NPR's Melissa Block and Guy Raz (All Things Considered) reported that the US military was saying that violence in Iraq had been reduced. Block and Raz are both self-effacing and not interested in giving credit to their peers. The reality is the US military said it and then the neutered and spaded press repeated it over and over -- including Block and Raz. Truth didn't matter. Actual reporting didn't matter. It only mattered that they all file the claim and then -- if they hadn't already strained themselves taking down dictation -- they grab onto some anectdotal 'evidence' (which Centcom has been happily supplying) and offer that as proof. From the Abbey of Non-think, St. Thomas filed in the New York Times this morning the absurd claim that, "It's clear that the surge by US troops has really dampened violence in Iraq." Never one to be left out on a misinformation campaign, the paper's own War pornographer Michael Gordon (Judith Miller's co-writer on several of the more fictious 'reports') was given room to prance around naked on the front page shreiking "violence in Iraq on the decline"! And I thought that was his career that was on the decline? Gordo and St. Thomas and all the other cowardly peers missed the fact that Thursday saw at least 54 deaths reported in Iraq with reports of over 29 injured. And that doesn't Cara Buckley (New York Times) reporting today on an attack on Hawr Rajab village that claimed the lives of "at least 11 people" with the attackers wearing the uniforms of either the Iraqi military or the US collaborating Awakening Council. That would take the 54 to 65 dead. However the number is higher and AFP's reporting suggests that Buckley's referring to one incident but using the numbers from another. AFP reports that there was an attack in Hawr Rajab but it killed 3 Iraqi soldiers and 10 citizens while 11 died in another attack -- an attack on the village of Al-Kulaiyah. Regardless of where the attacks took place, that's another thirteen bringing Thursday's total to 78 dead. At least 78 deaths that were reported. And the press organs sends their dancing monkeys out to entertain with lies of safety. Dance, little monkeys, dance, prove that training didn't go to waste.

Staying on the topic of lies there's The Myth of the Great Return. Things are so safe in Iraq, that people are eager to return. That's the lie anyway. BBC tried to enlist and do their part this week. Like a battered woman confronted by the stares of her neighbor, they repeated the lies they were told to, that a large number of Iraqis were returning to Iraq. They used the numbers the puppet government of Iraq fed them. They didn't try to verify the numbers. Maybe because the numbers can't be verified and they figured, "Why bother?" But buried in their own 'reporting' were certain uncomfortable realities. The Iraqi government is sending buses into Syria to bring Iraqis back and paying them to return. That explains the small trickle. But don't let the press off the hook because desperate though the refugees may be, if the media hadn't popularized the lie of 'safety' in Iraq, some might have elected not to return. The families of any who die should closely scrutinize the reports and columns to determine whether they have a case for litigation. The United Nations today issued a statement condemning the claims which noted, "UNHCR does not believe that the time has come to promote, organize or encourage returns. That would be possible only when proper return conditions are in place -- including material and legal support and physical safety. Presently, there is no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq as the security situation in many parts of the country remains volatile and unpredictable." Repeating from the statement "no sign of any large-scale return to Iraq".

Patrick Martin (WSWS) zooms in on the lies of the New York Times regarding the alleged 'Great Return': "A front-page report in Tuesday's New York Times gave the newspaper's stamp of approval to the Bush administration's policy in Iraq. The report, spread across four columns under the headline, 'Baghdad's Weary Start to Exhale as Security Improves,' described improving conditions of life and security in the war-torn Dora neighborhood in southern Baghdad, portraying it as the outcome of the massive US military buildup in the Iraqi capital. The Times report consists of a single anecdotal account--the story of one Shiite family who fled sectarian violence in Dora and has now returned--buttressed by figures supplied by the US military and the Iraqi regime, showing a decline in violent attacks from the highs recorded in the early part of this year. . . . After laying it on thick in this fashion, the Times is compelled to admit that the Shiite family profiled is more the exception than the rule. It describes the condition of a second Shiite family, the Nidhals, who fled violence in the west Baghdad neighborhood of Ghazaliya and have not returned because a Sunni family now occupies their home. . . . Why then the rose-colored portrayal of conditions in the Iraqi capital, prominently displayed in the most important American newspaper? Clearly what is involved here is a political adaptation by the Times, the most influential voice of official liberalism, to the Bush administration's policies in Iraq."Operation Happy Talk never ends, it's just one wave after another. In the real world . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Salahuddin roadside bombing that left four police officers wounded, a Mosul truck bombing targeting an Al-Qayara bridge in which "[t]wo of the bridge pillars" were destroyed, 2 Mosul car bombings that claimed 9 lives and left twenty-one wounded and a Baghdad roadside bombing on a pet market that claimed the lives of at least 13 people with fifty-seven more wounded. CNN puts the wounded toll at fifty-eight. Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reports, "The explosion left headless bodies, dead birds and shattered fish tanks around the Ghazil animal market in east Baghdad, where many families of all sects visit one of the most popular attractions in the city on the Muslim day of prayer." Paul Tait (Reuters) calls it the worst attack in Baghdad since car bombings on September 26th and notes, "Body parts were strewn among bird carcasses as bystanders piled victims into carts and rushed them to ambulances after the blast at the crowded Ghazil pet market. Police said four policemen were among the wounded." Reuters notes a Jurf Al Sakhar car bombing that killed 2 people visiting a mosque and injured two others. That's at least 24 reported dead today with at least eight-five wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that yesterday a "husband and wife" team of journalists for Al-Hayatt were shot at while traveling in their car but survived unharmed while today a boys school in Diyala was where a security "guard and his wife" were beheaded because "their two daughters are not following the Islamic laws." Reuters reports the beheadings differently: "Three suspected al Qaeda militans, including two sisters, beheaded their uncle and his wife forcing the couple's children to watch, Iraqi police said on Friday. The militans considered that school guard Youssef al-Hayali was an infidel because he did not pray and wore western-style trousers, they told police interrogators after being arrested in Diyala province northwest of Baghdad. The three cousnins executed Ayali and his wife Zeinab Kamel at the all-boys school in Jalawlah in Diyala province, village police chief Captain Ahmed Khalifa said." Reuters notes that yesterday "a doctor who was working with the US military" was shot dead in Kut.

That's two dead today (other reports were from yesterday but reported today).

Kidnappings?

Reuters notes "the manager of a grain company in Dhi Qar province" was kidnapped today.

That's at least 9 corpses reported found today. Add it to the previous figures and you have 35 reported dead so far today.

Free Bilal Huessein -- the Pulitzer Prize award winning photo journalist who has been imprisoned by the US military since April 12, 2006. AP reports, "A media watchdog on Thursday urged the U.S. military to show good cause for the detention [of] an Associated Press photographer in Iraq, and described his incarceration as 'unjust.' Military officials have alleged that Bilal Hussein, who has been detained for 19 months, had links to terrorist groups but are refusing to disclose what evidence or accusations would be presented. An AP investigation of the case, made public Wednesday, shows no support for allegations that Hussein, 36, took part in insurgent activities or bomb-making, and few of the images he provided deal directly with Iraqi insurgents. In a statement, Johann P. Fritz, director of the Vienna-based International Press Institute, said that the only grounds for Hussein's detention appeared to be the suspicion that he committed an offense. The burden of proof lies with the U.S. military to prove Hussein's guilt, Fritz said, adding it was fundamental to any criminal system that those holding the accused show good cause as to why they arrested him. This, he added, should then be tested in an independent court." David Crary (AP) reported on the AP investigation noting that, "Evidence and testimony collected by the AP shows no support for allegations that Bilal Hussein took part in insurgent activities or bomb-making, and few of the images he provided dealt directly with Iraqi insurgents" and then quotes from the fifty-page investigative report, "compiled last spring by lawyer and former federal prosecutor Paul Gardephe," noting, "Despite the fact that Hussein has not been interrogated since May 2006, allegations have been dropped or modified over time, and new claims added, all without any explanation. . . . The best evidence of how Hussein conducted himself as a journalist working for AP is the extensive photographic record. There is no evidence -- in nearly a thousand photographs taken over the 20-month period -- that his activities ever strayed from those of a legitimate journalist." The fifty-page investigative report can be read in full here (and it's not PDF format so there shouldn't be any problems for anyone attempting to read it). Bilal's 'crime' was documenting reality at a time when other trained (or 'trained') journalists were happy to supply fluff and stenography.

Ali al-Fadhily (IPS) continues to report reality from Iraq and notes that the true escalation of the year was the money the US tossed around to thugs and militias creating the roots for warlords (similar to the 'success' that is Afghanistan) and quotes Iraqi historian Wayil Hikmet explaining, "It is said in the Arab world that if thieves were not seen while stealing, they would be seen while dividing the loot. That is what goes for the accelerating collapse of the Iraqi political system that was made in the USA. The thieves of the Green Zone are now giving me and my colleagues good material to write down for the coming generations." andLukman Jassim explaining why the American-imposed 'parternship' of Abdul Aziz Hakim's Supreme Islamic Council in Iraq and Mutqtada al-Sadr's Sadr Movement will not work, "Hakim and Muqtada were brought to the scene by the Americans who employed the two ambitious clerics in order to fight side by side against any Iraqi resistance. But it is well known in Iraq that the two groups cannot put up with each other because of the historic disputes between their fathers and grandfathers and the conflict between them over power in Iraq. It was another American mistake."

Meanwhile the 'alleged' coalition continues to shrink. Press TV reports Donald Tusk, new prime minister, has declared Poland will be withdrawing from Iraq: "In a year's time, I will tell you here in parliament that our military mission in Iraq is over."

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

If a group of people were enslaved, terrorized, and legally excluded from all routes to improvement and prosperity, how would they fare? If they somehow managed to better their lot but then lost jobs, and were incarcerated in high numbers would they succeed or would they fail? If those economic and social changes were accompanied by political and economic decisions that put more money in the hands of the wealthy, would it be possible for that group to emerge from its awful predicament? The answers are obvious. That group of people would move backwards economically, politically, culturally, and spiritually. The decline would be certain and it would be awful.Of course the people in question are black Americans. The state of disarray and regression observed by anyone with common sense was proven recently by a Pew Charitable Trust study, Economic Mobility for Black and White Families. The study indicated that 45 % of black Americans whose parents were classified as "middle class" are now worse off than their parents. In other words, they are now poor.The propaganda that America is always the land of opportunity is manifestly untrue and particularly damaging to black people. If America is good and perfect, then any who fail are themselves to blame for their plight. Black people are by these terrible definitions inherently more blameworthy than any other group. After all, they were grudgingly given a break or two in the Sixties and Seventies. Because America is great and good, the redress of centuries of injustice was seen as a favor, not as the righting of many great wrongs. If the undeserving group doesn't thrive, then obviously that group is populated by lazy, ungrateful, inferior beings, entirely responsible for their plight.

Rebecca and I spoke about that study and are pretty sure one of us wrote about it. I was driving home when she called a short while ago. We were talking about Margaret Kimberley's column and the PEW study and we couldn't remember which one of us wrote about it? As Rebecca said, "With our memories, we are the worst to try to trip down memory lane." But when we were discussing it on the phone awhile back (not our talk tonight), we both pointed out what the PEW proves a lie, Barack Obama's claim that there were not "two Americas." It's a nice little spin that probably gets a number of Whites (not all, I'm White) applauding eagerly. "Yea! Yes! No problems! We don't need to talk about this! We don't need to worry about it!" But we do to need to talk about it and we do need to address it. The Civil Rights Movement accomplished huge strides, no question. But the movement wasn't over. And, like any movement, it was followed with a huge backlash.

But the reality is that the movement only brought some rights and those rights -- won they were -- really were saying, "Okay, we'll all start now!" But some of "we" were starting with a huge lead including finacial. Barack Obama's Chicken Sop for the Soul won't address that. It will, however, provide enough cover to allow people to say, "Oh, yeah, that was dealt with already."

The Darfur region of Sudan possesses the third largest copper and the fourth largest uranium deposits on the planet, in addition to strategic location and significant oil resources of its own. Is the US-based "Save Darfur" movement snowing the US public on the fundamental nature of the conflict in Sudan? Are "Save Darfur" and the prevention of genocide the covers of convenience for the next round of US oil and resource wars on the African continent?"The humanitarian tragedy in Darfur revolves around natural resources… Given current realities, no intervention in Darfur will proceed, and if it did it would fail."So opined the authors of the September 2006 OPED "Keeping Peacekeepers out of Darfur" [GN1](DHG, 9/15/06). Now, over a year later, the situation in Sudan is grimmer than ever, the Darfur conflict remains widely mischaracterized, and many of the predictions of that OPED have come true. Meanwhile, the "Save Darfur" advocates pressing military intervention in Darfur as a “humanitarian” gesture have escalated pressure in the face of mounting failures, including allegations that millions of "Save Darfur" dollars fundraised on a sympathy for victims platform have been misappropriated.The Darfur region of western Sudan has been a hotbed of clandestine activities, gunrunning and indiscriminate violence for decades. The Cold War era saw countless insurgencies launched from the remote deserts of Darfur. Throughout the 1990’s factions allied with or against Chad, Uganda, Ethiopia, Congo, Libya, Eritrea and the Central African Republic operated from bases in Darfur, and it was a regular landing strip for foreign military transport planes of mysterious origin. In 1990, Chad's Idriss Deby launched a military blitzkrieg from Darfur and overthrew President Hissan Habre; Deby then allied with his own ethnic group against the Sudan government. Sudanese rebels today have bases in Chad, and Chadian rebels have bases in Darfur, with Khartoum’s backing.[GN2] When the regime of Ange-Félix Patassé collapsed in the Central African Republic in March 2003, soldiers fled to Darfur with their military equipment. Khartoum supported the West Nile Bank Front, a rebel army operating against Uganda from Eastern Congo, commanded by Taban Amin, the son of the infamous Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin, who heads Uganda’s dreaded Internal Security Organization. Darfur is the epicenter of a modern-day international geopolitical scramble for Africa’s resources.

Keith Harmon Snow has been on this issue from the beginning. I wonder if he'll ever be booked on Democarcy Now! where he can offer realities there? If you missed it, Mike had two strong pieces on the topic of Our Modern Day Carrie Nations last month. First, he wrote this. That's after Ken Silverstein calls out "Save Darfur" and then wimps out the next day. Mike gets an e-mail (Mike's used to those, the Sammy Power brigade seems to spend all their time at the keyboards) and comments in full. The e-mail is from someone who is the former executive director of "Save Darfur" (his name is given, his comments are noted in full, then Mike replies). You should check out both of Mike's posts. And we should all start wondering about an international organization that not only spends millions on advertising but says that is their purpose. It's a p.r. campaign, that's all it is. (I'm talking at the top. I'm not talking of the rank and file.) It's a testement to how America's not ready to buy another war on lies that despite all the millions spent, despite all the soft press coverage, despite Nicky K's non-stop columns (he was most pathetic when he wished there was a photo of a suffering puppy he could use), America has said, "Go away Modern Day Carrie Nations." You know that has to upset Sammy Power. Her blood lust hasn't been satisfied with Iraq. She needs ever more deaths and dying. I am glad that Noam Chomsky, Tom Hayden and Howard Zinn have popped her bubble but I wish other of our big voices would call the war hawk's nonsense out. By the way, she tutured Bambi. One more reason not to love Obama. She tutored him, she had a high profile role in this campaign as well until the press (mainstream) started making jokes about her non-stop e-mails and what a joke they were. I guess it got back to the campaign how those were being shared (I saw some of them because C.I.'s friends in the mainstream press never hesitate to foward them as a sort of 'joke of the day') and Sammy Power suddenly is pushed out of the limelight.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, more on yesterday's helicopter crash, CODEPINK thanks and ask others to show their thanks, students continue to be active and more.

Starting with war resistance. "I remember the day kids started throwing rocks," James Circello Iraq veteran and war resister explains to Sara Olson (CounterPunch) who provides an overview of Circello's decision to check himself out of the military, the reaction of his parents, and his decision and quotes Iraq Veterans Against the War chair Camilo Mejia, "How do we honor veterans and then send them to fight in an illegal war? How do we honor the veterans and then not speak out about their service? We don't want to hear their analysis or their questions, and we don't want to hear how their 'service' in Iraq has changed them. How can we go on waving the flag and talking about supporting the troops, when we ignore the thousands of veterans opposing this war?" Olson's article concludes, "Last week, James turned himself in to the military at Ft. Knox, in Tennessee. Rather than going to prison as he had feared, James was simply discharged with an other than honorable discharge which prevents him from accessing healthcare or the GI Bill, but at least for now, James seems OK with that. Now he says he's ready to start the rest of his life, much of which is likely to be shaped by his time in Iraq and his experiences as an AWOL soldier opposing the war."

Meanwhile, in yesterday's snapshot we noted a Joanne Fischer, apparently Canada's answer to Mr. Richard Feder (see Roseanne Roseannadanna), and her 'logic' regarding war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today the Toronto Star is a buzz with responses to her illogical 'logic.' James Clark attempts to set her straight noting, "Many were soldiers who enlisted voluntarily, before they had the chance to be drafted, but quickly became opposed to the war after hearing from returning soldiers about what was really happening in Vietnam" and concluding, "Anyone who refuses to fight in an illegal and immoral war, whether in Vietnam or Iraq, should be welcomed to Canada as heroes, rather than jailed in the U.S. as criminals. It's time we let the resisters stay." Michael Gaspar notes, "Yet when Fisher argues that whether the Iraq war is just or unjust has no bearing on whether Hinzman and Hughey were justified in refusing their orders, she is really saying that an employment contract supercedes every other legal and moral responsibility. A soldier's right to refuse any order they believe would result in the commission of a war crime has been enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, as well as in the Nuremberg Principles. It is also set out in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (Article 92), which governs all U.S. military personnel. To argue the contrary, that a soldier must blindly follow all orders regardless of the consequences, takes us right back to the gates of Auschwitz." Matthew Swan also voices support for Hinzman and Hughey and notes, "The idea that soldiers should follow the orders of their superiors without question, or complete 'one's obligations,' as letter writer Joanne Fisher suggests, is repugnant. As she is familiar with the Vietnam War, she may remember the massacre at My Lai in 1968. A soldier who acts without thought is capable of acts against humanity." Also weighing in is Vietnam war resister Richard van Abbe who shares his own experience and concludes, "Perhaps it's true that Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey do not meet the stringent criteria to be considered refugees. And so what if they joined the military voluntarily? Surely they joined to help defend their country from attack -- not to fulfill the ambitions of an incompetent president in an invasion condemned around the world. In refusing further participation in this murderous fiasco, these two young men exemplify the humanity for which Canada is renowned. The government has the option of permitting them and others like them to stay on compassionate grounds, and it should do so without delay." Because asylum during that time period was never about the draft. The asylum was about the illegal war. The draft had been in place and utilized during the Korean War. Canada didn't feel the need to weigh in then. The issue was the war. Just as it is today.

The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Free Bilal Huessein. Bilal is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who was taken into military 'custody' on April 12, 2006. He's remained in 'custody'. He's been imprisoned for over 19 months without a trial, with the US military making baseless charges in an attempt to try the matter in the court of public opinion and this week's news is that they've announced they'll turn Bilal over to the Iraqi (puppet) government for a trial. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press issued this statement:

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press today condemned the process being used by the U.S. military to prosecute an Associated Press photographer who has been held without charge in Baghdad since April 2006.A Pentagon press spokesman said Monday that "new evidence has come to light" to prove the military's allegation that Bilal Hussein, 36, is "a terrorist operative who infiltrated the AP." He has been charged with unspecified crimes and U.S. military authorities in Iraq apparently will file a formal complaint against him in the Iraqi court system on Nov. 28.While AP officials have said they believe it is possible for Hussein to get a fair trial in Iraq, they criticized the U.S. military's failure to provide AP with specific information or evidence related to charges, which could hamper efforts to mount a defense and ultimately free Hussein, whom AP contends is innocent.AP officials have been working for 19 months to get the U.S. military to either charge Hussein with a crime or let him go. They have repeatedly criticized the government's failure to provide Hussein with basic due process protections found in the American court system.Hussein is part of the AP team that won a Pulitzer Prize for photography in 2005 for coverage of the Iraq war."The U.S. government has exhibited complete indifference to basic due process rights in the way they have treated Bilal Hussein," said Reporters Committee Executive Director Lucy Dalglish. "Even if you actually consider the Pentagon's threadbare accusations credible, it is outrageous that they would suddenly inform the AP that Hussein will be in court facing charges they won't specify but that could carry a penalty of capital punishment, based on evidence they won't disclose, on a day that could be as early as Nov. 29 -- but they won't tell you which day until 6:30 a.m. on the day itself. Does that sound like justice to you?"

Someone who knows a great deal about Bilal's case is Scott Horton. At Harper's magazine today, Horton explains, "There is probably no journalist in Iraq who did more to provide dramatic coverage of the insurgency in Al-Anbar than Bilal Hussein. This why he was seized, and it is why he is now coming to face charges. But in the end, the facts couldn't be plainer. The Pentagon's real gripe has never been with journalists on the ground like Hussein: it has been with the editors who allow their reporting to creep into the American mainstream. It is in the end about freedom of the press, and the right of the American public to secure more comprehensive coverage of what is happening in a war zone." As AP's CEO and president Tom Curley explained to Charles Layton (American Journalism Review) last year, "This is about thwarting a journalist from reporting the news. We have seen no fact that diminishes our belief that Bilal Hussein is not guilty of anything except committing journalism." At the end of this summer, Layton reviewed the many charges the US military has repeatedly made and how those have not panned out (repeatedly). Joe Strupp (Editor & Publisher) reports on the concerns for Bilal's case by AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll who explains, "I have no reason to think the Iraqi court system will be anything but fair and impartial. But they can only be imparital about what is presented to them. If one side has evidence and the other side doesn't know what it is, how can we defend Bilal? They have told our lawyers they will find out specifics when the complaint is filed next week."

Meanwhile, Amy Branham (Amy's Head) has photos posted of the vandalization of Iraq veteran Alexander Scott Arredondo's tombstone. His parents Carlos and Melida Arredondo have spoken out against the illegal war and last September, in DC, a group of right-wingers attempted to deface a casket Carlos Arredondo had in honor of his son Alex. When Carlos insisted they stop, the thugs attacked him. Now, apparently, similar thugs have taken to defacing his son's tombstone. Thugs trolling grave yards, thugs in charge of the country -- obviously since Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reports today, "The Pentagon is forcing thousands of wounded veterans to return signing bonuses they received for joining the army. The military says the injured soldiers aren't entitled to the money because they didn't complete their full tour of duty. Jordan Fox of Pennsylvania left the military three months early after being hit by a roadside bomb in Iraq. He sustained back injuries and lost all vision in his right eye. Earlier this month he received a Pentagon letter asking him to return some three thousand dollars in sign-up bonuses. Fox and his mother had recently started a program to send thousands of care packages to servicemembers in Iraq."

Yesterday a helicopter crashed in Iraq and the US military announced deaths. "Presumably US soldiers/service members but the military isn't saying," as noted in yesterday's snapshot. This morning there was still confusion as to the incident and whether another crash being discussed was the same one? A British helicopter crashed. BBC reported: "The US military issued a statement on Tuesday saying two people had been killed and 12 injured when a coalition helicopter crashed near Salman Pak, on the outskirts of the Iraqi capital. But a spokesman for the UK defence ministry said he could not confirm whether this was the same incident but the details did appear to match." UK's Ministry of Defence released the following: "It is with great sadness that the Ministry of Defence must confirm the deaths of two military personnel near Baghdad, Iraq last night, Tuesday 20 November 2007. The two personnel were killed when the RAF Puma helicopter they were travelling in crashed." The statement also notes two British soldiers were seriously wounded. Robin Stringer (Bloomberg News) noted that this brings to 173 the number of British troops killed in the illegal war. The Times of London says it appears they were SAS troops. That would be Special Air Service Regiment. The most public SAS event in Iraq may have previously been the Basra September 2005 incident when two SAS members were caught dressed in disguise and with explosives in the back of their car leading to their arrests, leading the British military to destroy Iraqi property and leading to many suspicions about exactly who is attacking Iraqi civilians since the men's 'costumes' were clearly intended to allow them to pass themselves off as Muslims. Thomas Harding (Telegraph of London) reports they are SAS and that, "The soldiers were part of anti-terrorist mission flying low over the city at night." And AFP says there was only one crash yesterday and that it was the British helicopter.

At Inside Iraq (McClatchy Newspapers), an Iraqi correspondent, writes, "Within two months I lost two of my best friends without say goodbye because they dead alone and far. Sorrow breaks my heart and I need to blame some one for that but how I could blame? Why death happens in that difficult way in Iraq only? Have you ever experienced the feeling of losing dears of your heart while you can not be beside them, sharing them the last moment or say goodbye to them. Anwar was a jounalist who was kidnapped and killed by terrorist in Baghdad. I couldn't say goodbye to him he just disappeared suddenly. His body found in the street three days after the incident. Ahmad used to work with UN when the terrorist threatened him. He was forced to leave the country to protect his life. Yes to run from death that was waiting for him in his exile . . . unfortunately Ahmad infected with kidney cancer while he is in exile. Another time I couldn't say goodbye to my dear friend. He is dying alone and far from his lovely land, no friends round him to share him his last hours as if that our destiny . . . die alone by terrorist or abroad far from whom we love." Not the kind of feel good spin that the mainstream turns out but then the correspondents only duty is to tell the truth which he or she does very well in the entry. It's a shame the same can't be said for many of the US correspondents in Iraq. Or rather, in the Green Zone of Iraq.

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing wounded three police officers, a Ramadi car bombing that claimed 5 lives (plus the person in the car for 6) with at least thirty people were wounded, and a Baquba explosion wounded two and a a bombing in Ranya city tarteged "[t]he head of the political prisoners in Kurdistan region" leaving him wounded. Reuters notes a Mosul truck bombing that claimed 1 life and injured three.

Today the US military has announced: " An explosively-formed penetrator detonated near a combat patrol in eastern Baghdad, killing one Multi-National Division  Baghdad Soldier and wounding three others Nov. 20. An Iraqi interpreter was also killed. The patrol was returning to base after conducting an escort mission at the time of the attack."

Turning to news of student activism. As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, US students let former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales know just how a torture czar should be greeted, "In Florida, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was greeted with a hostile reception Monday at his first public lecture since stepping down. Speaking at the University of Florida, Gonzales was repeatedly heckled with calls of "liar" and "criminal".' Just minutes into his talk, two students climbed the stage dressed in Guantanamo Bay prison jumpsuits and hooded masks. The students were led away and arrested. At least a dozen audience members stood with their backs to Gonzales during his hour-long speech. He did not take questions from the audience. Gonzales was paid forty-thousand dollars for the appearance." And Sam Beaton (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) reports, "Glasgow and Strathclyde university Stop the War groups mobilised to oppose US ambassador Robert Tuttle's visit to Glasgow University last Wednesday. Tuttle has lied about rendition flights of prisoners and the use of chemical weapons in Iraq. He was met by a group of 60 demonstrators. After his meeting, activists blocked the building and prevented him from leaving for over an hour. The demonstration showed Tuttle and other war criminals that our movement will hold them to account for their actions." ["Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place. If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by making a donation."]

On the topic of activism, CODEPINK has a new action and also gives thanks to all who have participated in previous ones:

Over 4 million Iraqis are currently displaced and impoverished as a result of war and sectarian violence. This week, as we give thanks for all the blessings in our lives, we need also to remember those who are suffering because of our disastrous military policy in Iraq. We wanted to share with you a message we received from our friends in Iraq who are providing aid to Iraqi orphans, widows and internally displaced people. They work under the radar so we need to keep them anonymous, but here are their words:"Our organization has succeeded in opening a new branch in the north in Nineveh Province. We now have five branches. We also have arranged a special medical clinic that provides free services for widows & orphans in Abu-Ghraib. We have enough funds to run this clinic for three months and hope to receive more financial assistance to keep it going. We are walking a long and difficult road in Iraq and try to focus on the good we can do for people here so we don't feel hopeless. Thank you to the women of CODEPINK for your continuous work to bring freedom and peace to my country."When you donate to CODEPINK this week, half the proceeds will go toward assisting Iraqi women and children, and half will go toward funding our continuing actions on Capitol Hill. Your donation will work to end the occupation and help repair the awful damage this military misadventure has wrought. Click here and scroll down for more information on the dire humanitarian crisis in Iraq.On this Thanksgiving, we want to thank YOU for your continuing support -- thank you for joining our vigils and marches, for making phone calls to Congress, for signing petitions and coming up with new and creative ways to raise your voice for peace. We couldn't do this important work without you.

Coming up on Democracy Now! 1) Thursday, November 22, 2007: On this 75th Anniversary of "Brother Can You Spare a Dime" and the 60th Anniversary of "Finnian's Rainbow," A Tribute to the Blacklisted Lyricist Yip Harburg: The Man Who Put the Rainbow in theWizard of Oz. (This is one of the two favorite holiday specials in the community. If you're able to catch it -- watch, listen or read -- take the time to share it with someone.) 2) Friday, November 23, 2007: Leading Australian Scientist Tim Flannery on Global Warming and the Worsening Dangers of Climate Change Denial. We play a speech he gave in Santa Fe, NM.(The second is a new special. Goodman interviewed Flannery during the last pledge drive cycle.) If you want to share it over the holidays, remember Democracy Now! streams online (live and also after the live broadcast) and you can also check the site to see which stations in your area or the area you may be in for the holidays broadcast DN! on TV or radio. Goodman will be taking part in the Pacifica Radio Archives special next Tuesday which will raise money to preserve the rich audio history that Pacifica has offered throughout its history. The 24 hour special will include many programs looking at the Black Panthers, feminism and much more. Goodman will be contributing to the specials on war resisters -- historical and current. Aimee Allison, who co-wrote with David Solnit Army Of None and now co-hosts KPFA's The Morning Show, will be on with Goodman for one special (Allison is a war resister of the Gulf War).

On Friday, November 23 at 8:30 pm (check local listings) NOW shines a bright light on the scandalous connection between VECO Corporation -- an Alaska-based oil services company -- and Alaska's old-boy Republican network. Two state legislators have been convicted in Federal court for accepting bribes from VECO, while one more awaits trial. The FBI has video and audio evidence that reveal VECO executives shockingly handing out cash to those legislators in exchange for promises to roll back a tax on the oil industry. But that may only be the tip of the oily iceberg. NOW's Maria Hinojosa learns that dozens more lawmakers are being eyed in the growing scandal, including one of the country's most powerful politicians, Alaska U.S. Senator Ted Stevens. NOW investigates the bribes, the connections to big oil and the payoffs to obtain friendly tax policies. The NOW website at www.pbs.org/now offers a web-exclusive report detailing how the oil and gas industry navigated Washington power structures during the past eight years. Using campaign contribution and lobbying data, the article connects the dots between the industry's biggest spenders and the favorable policy outcomes they received. The report also exposes the connections between Big Oil and 2008 Presidential candidates.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

AMY GOODMAN: A little-noticed anti-terrorism bill, quietly making its way through Congress is raising fears of the new affront on activism and constitutional rights. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in an overwhelming 400-6 House vote last month. Critics say it could herald a new government crackdown on dissent and infiltration of universities under the guise of fighting terrorism. The bill would establish two government-appointed bodies to study, monitor, and propose ways of curbing what it calls homegrown terrorism and extremism in the United States. The first body, a national commission, would convene for 18 months. The university-based "Center for Excellence" would follow, bringing together academic specialists to recommend laws and other measures. Critics say the definition of extremism and terrorism is too vague and its mandate even more broad. Under a false veil of expertise and independence, they say, the government-appointed commissions could be used as ideological cover to push through harsher laws. Following last month's approval in the House, the Senate version is expected to go before the Judiciary Committee this week. Two guests join us now in the Firehouse studio. Kamau Franklin is an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights. CCR has been closely following the measure. And Jessica Lee with us. She’s a journalist with the Indypendent, put out by the New York Indymedia Center. She has an extensive piece in the latest issue of the Indypendent. Its called "Bringing The War On Terrorism Home: Congress Considers How To 'Disrupt' Radical Movements In The United States." Jessica, let's begin with you. Lay out what this bill is.

JESSICA LEE: Thank you for having me. When I first heard about this, I immediately did a Google news search and was alarmed to find that no media was talking about it whatsoever. So I looked into the bill and are two things that immediately jumped out of me. The first was that there is a broad use of definitions and the second is, who would they study? What does this mean? I would first like to point out the two definitions that many people I interviewed had problems with. And if you wouldnt mind me just reading them. The first is "violent radicalization". This term means "the process of adapting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically-based violence to advance political, religious, or social change". Many people I interviewed were very concerned about this. The second definition, which is "homegrown terrorism", talks about the planned use, threatened use, of force or violence by a group to intimidate or coerce the government of the United States. When you think about these definitions, what does that mean? When you look at the activism going on today, is there planned use of force or coercion going on? When you look at what is going on in Olympia, with individuals sitting down and blocking war shipments. When you look at Code Pink going into Congress and disrupting activities. Could this be included in this definition? And that’s what I went out to try to find my article.

AMY GOODMAN: Kamau Franklin, your concerns?

KAMAU FRANKLIN: Somewhere, as Jessica stated, the broad definitions allow for new laws that can be passed. that can basically equate social justice activism and civil disobedience to terrorism in some ways. So in the past if someone got charged for blocking the street, there were charged with disorderly conduct, or obstruction of governmental administration. Now, after this commission is done, if new laws are passed, with the broadness of the definitions, the Feds can now say "well, wait a minute, you threatened the use of violence or threatened the use of force. And that by itself can mean that we can now charge you with federal terrorist crimes because we do not agree with the type of demonstration that you were doing, we don't agree with the point of view that you were having". So its the broad based-ness, the breadth, the scope of the inquiry, which is really threatening for potential activists, people concerned with social justice issues and civil libertarians, something people should really be concerned about.

That's from Democracy Now!'s "Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act Raises Fears of New Government Crackdown on Dissent" today. In "Mailbag" (The Third Estate Sunday Review) the issue of how some topics get covered by some sites came up and this is the perfect example. I heard Democracy Now! this morning and left messages that I would be grabbing this topic. That didn't mean anyone else had to avoid it. But Elaine wanted to respond to a bad article on students, Mike wanted to weigh in on Balil Hussein, Rebecca's going to be covering some Iraq stuff. My grabbing it means no one has to feel guilty. Wally & Cedric covered the whines from the White House about the War Budget and Ruth covered an interview with Susan Faludi. C.I., of course, covered Iraq in multiple entries today. So when I left a message that I was grabbing this, it allowed others to grab other topics if they wanted. It didn't mean anyone couldn't write about it. It did mean that if they had something they wanted to write about and were thinking, "Should I write about that or this?" they could write about that.

You can check out the Center for Constitutional Rights for information on a wide variety of important topics. But there's nothing up at the site about the topic discussed on today's show.

The interview? The CCR guy says later (remember you can listen, watch or read at DN!) that it will pass the Senate (he expects -- he's probably right) and that we'll need grassroots movement. But what I understood -- read it yourself -- is that the grassroots movement is to expand understanding, not to stop the law. I hope I misunderstood that.

So what we're seeing is an attack on free speech. That's all that this laughable and insulting proposed legislation is (passed by the House already). To no surprise, Jane Harmon is overly involved in the process. Big surprise. Jane Harmon would give away every right we have if she had the power to. She betrays the Constitution in a different way every day.

And writing that might be considered the sort of speech that would get me tossed away somewhere. We need to realize that and grasp that there's no need for this law. If there's a suspected 'terrorist,' you better believe they're already being watched. In fact, most of us are. This legislation helps no one but it does cut away at the Constitution. You have to wonder how long they can keep chipping away before there's nothing left to it?

What is the country coming to? That's a question we should all be asking.

We should also be asking why jaw-boners continue to waste our time talking about the draft? There is no draft. That's not a bad thing. But they keep talking about it and talking about, how 'back then' blah, blah, blah. You know, go find a bar stool and relive the past. It's not helping anyone today.

There is no draft. The draft didn't cause huge protests during Vietnam. Women weren't protesting because they might be drafted. Male college students were not in danger of being drafted unless they lost their student deferment. As C.I. points out, this nonsense is damaging today's war resisters in Canada. The right's running with, "It was different during Vietnam! There was a draft!" That's not why Canada gave asylum during Vietnam. They gave it because it was an illegal war. Just like today.

I'm sorry all the male left in college in the '60s (that didn't get drafted) need to work it up into some awesome fear that hung over their head in retrospect to try to prove how manly they were. That's not reality. My grandmother was the first to say that the war was wrong of the 'old folks' in my house. My grandfather took 2 more years to come around (and both of my parents were against the illegal war by then). But before he came around, he knew the score re: the draft. He would see college men on TV protesting and point out that they weren't going to Vietnam, they were in college. They had a deferment. Dick Cheney got deferments for college, for marriage and for being a father.

We don't have a draft today. That's both reality and a good thing. Stop your gas baggery about the draft. War resisters during Vietnam were welcomed into Canada because there was an illegal war going on. They could go there and get asylum to avoid going to Iraq. They could go there after they'd been in Vietnam. The latter half clearly wasn't there to avoid the draft. They were already in. That's why they weren't called 'draft dodgers.' Stop confusing the issue, stop doing damage.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, a US military helicopter crashes, the damage today from the "It was the draft that ended a war!" lie, Bilal Hussein tried in the court of public opinion (because the military can't win in a court of law), and more.

Starting with war resistance. And we'll start with an educational tool. Click here for Canada's CBC audio and video archives on war resisters during Vietnam. Such information won't necessarily help because there's a lot of Dumb Ass out there. Some of which knows better because they lived through the period. South Carolin's Daily Gamecock can honestly plead youth when they argue US war resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey have no right to remain Canada because they enlisted so it's somehow different than those avoiding the draft during Vietnam. What The Daily Gamecock can be forgiven for, others can't. Take Canada's National Post (a conservative rag, to be sure) which argues for Hinzman and Hughey to be sent back to the US because this is different than during Vietnam and goodness, "the United States is a democratic ally whose respect for the rule of law matches our own." First, I had no idea Canada's respect for the rule of law had fallen so greatly. Second, does the National Post believe that Canada was engaged with a war during the 60s and 70s? The US and Canada were 'democratic allies' then as well. "Send Them Home" cries the editorial board of the National Post. "Send your editors somewhere to get an education," is the response back. A Joanne R. Fisher writes the Toronto Star that Hinzman and Hughey had a choice. She doesn't make the mistake the South Carolina student paper does but then she's older. So she knows it was not just "draft dodgers" it was also "deserters." She even uses the terms herself. Possibly she greeted them all upon entry with open arms as a sort of Miss Canadian Borders?

No, she didn't. Nor was she involved in the war resistance then. But to accept the 'logic' of her argument you have to assume she did or thinks she did. She says the difference is Hinzman and Hughey volunteered. Sorry to shock her -- and she's old enough to know better -- but war resisters going to Canada during Vietnam included those deserting after they'd enlisted. It didn't matter. It wasn't an issue. And no one in the Canadian government was saying, "Well you showed up for your draft board, live with it." Or, "Well you weren't even drafted! You enlisted on your own!" Or any other of the faux-talking points that get ginned up by the likes of Dumb Asses today. War resisters who sought refuge in Canada during Vietnam did so in opposition to the illegal war going on. Those of us old enough to know better remember should know better. Sadly some of the worst offenders of the "Glories of the Draft" are, yes, some men on the left who continue to trot that lie out even though none of the ones trotting it out were ever drafted. You really think Canada gave a damn if the US drafted or not? The issue was an illegal war.

Can you be sent to fight in an illegal war was the issue and the government of Canada provided refuge to those resisting. The issue was not, "Can you be drafted? Should governments draft?" Those were not issues that mattered in terms of what was going on then. There was not a motion to support those resisters who were drafted but not the ones who enlisted. For those late to the party a draft resister or 'draft dodger' had not been inducted but received notice, a deserter was someone who had begun serving and self-checked out.

So let's all drop the nonsense that Canada provided asylum because there was "A DRAFT!!!" Those lies are hurting today's movement.

The draft was not the issue. The issue was the illegal war. Pierre Trudeau said what in 1969? "Those who make the conscientious judgement that they must not participate in this war . . . have my complete sympathy, and indeed our political approach has been to give them access to Canada. . . . Canada should be a refuge from militarism." He said nothing about "Those who make the conscientious judgement -- because they are drafted . .." Flashing back to October 2nd, US House Rep Christopher Shays insisted, "I was a conscientious objector. I was in the Peace Corp!" Point being, the draft could be got around by White men -- as a number of men of a certain age damn well should know -- and was. Nearly half of the US men seeking refuge in Canada during Vietnam were deserters. There was no Q & A they had to participate in asking, "Well, did you enlist or join after you got a draft notice? Oh, you enlisted? Sorry, you'll need to return to the US." The concern was the illegal war -- which Canada's government sat out and the people of Canada overwhelming opposed -- same as today.

The illegal war. The abuses that were taking place. The crimes that were taking place. The lies about the war, about how it could be won, how it was being 'won,' lie, lie, lie while more Vietnamese and US service members died. The "DRAFT DID IT" lie not only erases the involvement of women in the peace movement and the work done, it not only reduces a generation that had beliefs and values into something much more shallow than the right-wing could imagine. The issue was the illegal war then and it's the issue today.

Attempting to make it the draft -- as some on the left encourage with their talk and some on the right sieze on -- is ridiculous. The issue was the war and is the war. Which is why we don't waste time making arguments like, "Okay, Hughey should be sent back because he knew the Iraq War was going on but Hinzman enlisted before that happened!" In fairness to all above, at least they are writing about it. Whatever mistakes, whatever right-wing rants, they are covering it. You can't say the same for the 'left' and left which goes a long way towards explaining why the illegal war drags on.

Back in August 2006, the number of deserters from all branches of the U.S. Military was reported at 40,000 service men and women since the year 2000; most deserting at the break of the Iraq War. Because no one would ever abandon a branch of the military just to return, I can only assume this number has increased over the past year. Even with the thousands of cases of delinquent soldiers, the story of two deserters, Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, is making the front pages.After realizing that they could not bring themselves to kill another human being, Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey deserted the U.S. Army and crossed our northern border into Canada. Rather than find a remote area and hide, they decided to fight their deportation in the public sector. The two soldiers openly and publicly placed a bid with the Canadian government to receive refugee status. On Thursday, November 15, their refugee submission, which had already been denied by the Supreme Court of Canada, was officially terminated when they declined to preside over subsequent appeals. The Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration believes refugee status should only be given to persons in true need of it.

Good so far. But what does Jamison -- who didn't live through Vietnam -- do next? Go to the draft. That's not Jamison's fault. That's the fault of his elders. Repeating, your useless memories of a time gone by (distorted memories at that) are not doing today's war resisters or today's young adults any good. BBC's Lee Carter offers a report (text and audio) which concludes, "In response to the latest rebuff by the Supreme Court, the men's lawyer and a political support group are appealing to Canada's Conservative government to issue a special permit that would allow men to stay in Canada." The War Resisters Support Campaign and Courage to Resist are two of the ogranizations with campaigns to lobby the Canadian Parliament to step up. Reflecting on the refusal by the Canadian Supreme Court, Heather Mallick (CBC) offers: "The Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by American war resisters that they not be sent back to the U.S. for prosecution and has thrown the matter back to Parliament. The principle is 'refugee asylum' and it's odd that the court suddenly won't recognize the nature of the dispute. Here's what Pierre Elliott Trudeau said during the Vietnam War: 'Those who make the conscientious judgment that they must not participate in this war have my complete sympathy, and indeed our political approach has been to give them access to Canada. Canada should be a refuge from militarism.' Look at us now.In the 1960s, those fine young Americans brought energy, drive, and decency to Canada; they did good things here. But suddenly it isn't fashionable for justices to take a stand against the bullying of these boxed-in people. True, the court has accurately taken Canada's moral measure. The House of Commons is not going to tell the absurd Bush that we'll offer refuge to those who don't want to fight his wretched war, even if most American citizens would admire us for it." Judith Siers-Poisson (PR Watch) notes the November 14th preview in Madison of Kimberly Peirce's new film Stop-Loss [Peirce directed Boys Don't Cry for which Hillary Swank won her first Academy Award as Best Actress; among those appearing in Peirce's new film are Channing Tatum, Ryan Phillippe, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Laurie Metcalf, etc.] and notes the climbing desertion rates for the US army as well as Hinzman and Hughey and she cites Elizabeth May (leader of Canada's Green Party) explains that her adopted country of Canada should not "facilitate the persecution of American war objectors by deporting them to the United States."

The voice of war resister Camilo Mejia is featured in Rebel Voices -- playing now through December 16th at Culture Project and based on Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's best-selling book Voices of a People's History of the United States. It features dramatic readings of historical voices such as war resister Mejia, Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, Malcom X and others will be featured. Zinn will take part in the November 18th presentation (the official opening night -- but performances are already taking place) and musician Allison Mooerer will head the permanent cast while those confirmed to be performing on selected nights are Ally Sheedy (actress and poet, best known for films such as High Art, The Breakfast Club, Maid to Order, the two Short Circuit films, St. Elmo's Fire, War Games, and, along with Nicky Katt, has good buzz on the forthcoming Harold), Eve Ensler who wrote the theater classic The Vagina Monologues (no, it's not too soon to call that a classic), actor David Strathaim (L.A. Confidential, The Firm, Bob Roberts, Dolores Claiborne and The Bourne Ultimatum), actor and playwright Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride, Clueless -- film and TV series, Gregory and Chicken Little), actress Lili Taylor (Dogfight, Shortcuts, Say Anything, Household Saints, I Shot Andy Warhol, Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle, State of Mind) and actor, director and activist Danny Glover (The Color Purple, Beloved, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Rainmaker, Places In The Heart, Dreamgirls, Shooter and who recently appeared on Democracy Now! addressing the US militarization of Africa) The directors are Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati with Urbinati collaborating with Zinn and Arnove on the play. Tickets are $21 for previews and $41 for regular performances (beginning with the Nov. 18th opening night). The theater is located at 55 Mercer Street and tickets can be purchased there, over the phone (212-352-3101) or online here and here. More information can be found at Culture Project.

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 15th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation.

Meanwhile, the US military continues tracking down those who self-check out although they continue to deny they do. AP reported this morning on Justin Faulkner who suffers from PTSD already from his first time stationed in Iraq and who checked into Lexington's VA hospital on Thursday "and doctors there told him they wanted to keep him until Monday for observation" which ended when police barged into the hospital Saturday moring (2:00 a.m.), handcuffed him and hauled him off to jail. Faulkner tells Jeffrey McMurray (AP) that he repeatedly used the Fort Campbell base resources but they did not work while his wife Brandy (due to give birth to the couple's second child in March) explains that "in the past few weeks, he has been constantly walking and talking in his sleep. She found about about her husband's arrest when she got a call early Saturday from somebody at the VA hospital." Numerous reports note that Fort Campbell's flack Cathy Gramling refuses to comment -- of course she does, this is appalling. There's no pleasing public relations move that can cover this shameful action. It may, however, remind some of Brad Gaskins who self-checked out of the military to get treatement for his PTSD and was enroute to Fort Drum with attorney and activist Tod Ensign when police came into the Different Drummer Cafe to arrest him -- despite the fact that they had notified Fort Drum that Gaskins was turning himself in. In Sunday's New York Times, Fernanda Santos updates her earlier reporting on Gaskins to note that his PTSD has resulted in previous hospitalization and that he "could be discharged from the Army for medical reasons. He could be court-martialed, which could land him in prison and prevent him from receiving veterans' benefits." Speaking with Gaskins, his family and those who have treated him, Santos attempts to trace when he began exhibiting signs of PSTD and notes that by a two-week pass in August 2006, he was "biting his nails compulsively," had difficult sleeping and woke with night sweats and screaming, retreated to "a darkened room at his grandmother's apartment in Newark whenever her friends stopped by," took a knife to the throat of his wife and more. Prior to that pass, the military had in Samaritan Medical Center where he was heavily dozed.

Turning to Australia. On Sunday, INN reported: that Professor Hugh White ("One of Australia's top defence experts) declared that "the United States-led coalition cannot win the conflicts in either Iraq or Afghanistan." Graeme Dobell (Australia's ABC) reports that White appeared on the network's Correspondents Report program amd dec;ared that despite the fact that there is no 'win' in Iraq for the US, there will not be a withdrawal and White states, "I think that's the tragedy of the American position." Dobell interviewed White for Correspondents Report (link is multi-media -- read, listen, watch):

Graeme Dobell: Whoever becomes president in Washington in January 2009, will they be prepared, Republican or Democrat, to stay in Iraq for another four years to keep taking hundreds and hundreds of casualties?

Hugh White: Yes, I think they probably will and I think you can already see that in the way in which the debate over Iraq is evolving in the run-up to the US presidential election in next year. I think one could say that 2006 was the year in which American realised that they couldn't win in Iraq. 2007 has been the year in which they've realised they can't get out. Even the Democrat candidates are acknowledging that there'll need to be substantial US forces in Iraq for many years to come.

Say what? White goes on to declare that that "for Americans, terrible though it seems, the costs, including the costs in lives of staying in Iraq are known and understood and are bearable". As Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) noted today, "A new study by the watchdog group Media Matters has found that Democratic and Republican candidates have been asked few questions about their views on executive power, the Constitution, torture, wiretapping, or other civil liberties concerns during the first 17 presidential debates. According to Media Matters there has been only one question about wiretapping. Not a single question about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or renditions. The words 'habeas corpus' have not once been spoken by a debate moderator. Candidates have also not been asked about whether telecoms should be granted immunity over their role in domestic spying. Last week's debate ended with Senator Hillary Clinton being asked whether she preferred diamonds or pearls. The question was asked by a UNLV student who has since said that she was forced by CNN to ask that question instead of a pre-approved query about the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository." The Media Matters report can be found here and while those are issues are important so is the illegal war which the debates have increasing moved away from despite the fact that the public hasn't moved on the illegal war in terms of public opinion. On the subject of the press: Free Bilal. Bilal Hussein is an AP photographer, a Pulitzer Prize award winning journalist whom the US military has held for over 19 months since grabbing him off the streets of Ramadi where he was doing his job. BBC notes that after all this time of imprisonment, the US military is now saying they have new evidence against him and want to try him. However, CNN points out, "Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell and other U.S. military officials would not say directly what charges he faced." Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) provided this overview today: "The U.S. military has decided to turn over an Associated Press photographer to an Iraqi court for criminal prosecution. The U.S. has held the journalist, Bilal Hussein, without charge for 19 months. Military officials accuse him of having links to terrorist groups operating inside Iraq. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said: 'This case does not hinge on a single piece of evidence but rather a range of evidence that makes it clearer than before that Bilal Hussein is a terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP.' AP officials have vigorously protested Hussein's detention. The news agency conducted its own investigation and determined that Hussein had no ties to militants. Attorneys for the Associated Press say they have been denied access to Hussein and the evidence against him, making it impossible to build a defense. In 2005, the Iraqi born journalist was part of a team of AP photographers that won the Pulitzer Prize. Bilal Hussein is not the only journalist being held by the U.S. military. Al Jazeera camera man Sami Al Haj has been imprisoned at Guantanamo for over five years." Journalism organizations are rightly raising objections. Reporters Without Borders announces it has "called on the US authorities to act transparently in the case of Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein after the US defence department announced yesterday that it has finally brought criminal charges against him before an Iraqi court after holding him without charges since 12 April 2006. It has taken more than a year and a half for the US military to initiate judicial proceedings against this journalist and yet they still have not revealed the charges. The judicial vagueness surrounding this case is distrubing and unacceptable. Hussein's lawyers will have to appear in court without being able to prepare their client's defence as the US authorities refuse to say in advance what evidence they have." The Committee to Protect Journalists quotes their executive director Joel Simon stating, "That Bilal Hussein has been held for more than 19 months without charge and on the pretext of unsubstantiated, shifting allegations is deeply alarming. While we welcome the military's belated attempt to give him his day in court, we are equally alarmed that he continues to be denied due process and that his legal team has no idea what the evidence is against him so they can prepare a proper defense." Associated Press' General Counsel Dave Tomlin observes this to be "a sham of due process" and states of the latest claims by the US military, "That's what the military has been saying for 19 months, but whenever we ask to see what's so convincing we get back something that isn't convincing at all." AP's president and CEO Tom Curley declares that there are "grave concerns that his right under the law continue to be ignored and even abused. The steps the U.S. military is now taking continue to deny Bilal his right to due process and, in turn, may deny him a chance at fair trial. The treatment of Bilal represents a miscarriage of the very justice and rule of law that the United States is claiming to help Iraq achieve. At this point, we believe the correct recourse is the immediate release of Bilal." On the one year anniversary of Bilal's imprisonment (April 12, 2007), Scott Horton (Harper's magazine) shared, "I was involved with Bilal Hussein's case through the end of last year and I personally conducted investigations that disproved many of the contentions advanced -- and then quickly withdrawn -- by U.S. Forces in Iraq. From my own examination of the case and discussions with U.S. representatives, I was convinced that Bilal Hussein was seized and has been held in captivity for the last year for one reason: the Pentagon was embarrassed by the photographs he took of the fighting in Al-Anbar province. They contradicted the message the Pentagon was putting out about the nature and scope of fighting in Al-Anbar and senior figures in the Bush Administration were particularly galled that the AP won the Pulitzer Prize for its photographic coverage of the war. The Pentagon wanted to send a message to the entire press community in Iraq: Cross us, and we can just lock you up. And we don't need reasons. This is justice in the style of the Bush administration." That other news outlets aren't loudly insisting Bilal be released is why he's been held for over 19 months. But what do you expect from a mainstream press which (this week) files an Iraq report of first hand observations by a reported . . . not in Iraq, or that regularly grabs when the military shops 'human interest' angles including whom to talk to?

At the start of this year, US helicopters didn't 'crash' in Iraq according to the military. They had 'emergency landings,' they had 'hard landings,' they might even have 'crash landings,' but never a 'crash.' Ignoring brass spin, the press started reporting reality with regards to those crashes. Today, CBS and AP report that another US helicopter has crashed and claimed the lives of "two soldiers" while leaving 12 more service members wounded -- presumably US soldiers/service members but the military isn't saying. Reuters notes that Major Brad Leighton delivered the announcement that the crash took place "near the town of Salman Pak" and stated it "was not the result of enemy fire." It never is, is it? All these helicopters just fall on their own. If true, Congress would need to seriously investigate that safety hazard. Over sixty US helicopters have crashed in the illegal war. The last known crash was August 22nd and it claimed the lives of 14 US soldiers on board. The spin the day of that crash was that it was "mechanical malfunction" and "under investigation". Salman Pak, by the US military's own statements, such as in March of this year, is an area where items such as "rocket-propelled launchers" are regularly found.

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the latest in the targeting of officials in Iraq is Dr. Musa Ja'afar who was "the head of the Geological survey" until he was shot dead today in Uttaifiyah, while in Zighania a home invasion resulted in 3 brothers being shot dead and a sister wounded, in Diyala Province an 18-year-old woman was shot dead in her home while dropping back to Monday, Kadhim notes that police officer Jamal Falij was targeted with a bomb inside his car which took his life and left two other police officers wounded. Reuters notes a 15-year-old male shot 2 men dead in Baghdad.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 6 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 2 corpses discovered in Basra. Reuters notes "police major Saad Jumaa" was discovered dead outside Samarra today after being kidnapped yesterday and, also today, 3 corpses were discovered in Dhuluiya while 4 corpses (Iraqi soldiers) were discovered in Samarra yesterday and 4 in Suwayra.Yesterday's snapshot noted an 18-year-old woman shot in the leg that resulted in 43 arrests including 1 American contractor. Today Cara Buckley (New York Times) reports that "Maj. Brad Leighton, a spokesman for the military, said none of those arrested were Americans. The military said the episode involved Almco, a Dubai-based company under contract to the military." Buckley says 43 were arrested and that Almco "has a construction contract with the Department of Defense's Joint Contracting Command Iraq and another contract to provide food, water and other basic services with the Multi-National Security Tranistion Command". Mariam Karouny and Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) note Brig.-Gen. Qassim ("Baghdad security" spokesperson) declared today, "We demand that all security companies obey the law and orders released by the Iraqi government, otherwise the security forces will be obliged to deal firmly with these companies."

Ali al-Fahily (IPS) is not bound to the Green Zone and he reports on the reality with Falluja which is still treated like a prison ("completely closed and surrounded by military checkpoints to make it look like an isolated island") and the isolation has destroyed the local economy, how speaking to the media results in US detention, how the city still hs a minimum of public services (water and electricity). But the mainstream press is going to ride the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk until they wipe out. Which is why you have to go to Robert Parry (Consortium News) to find how Bully Boy "is turning Iraq into a test tube for modern techniques of repression, from sophisticated biometrics that track populations to devastating weapons systems that combine night-vision optics from drone aircraft, heat resonance imaging and deadly firepower from the sky to kill suspected insurgents." It's why it's John Pilger (New Stateman) noting the Lancet's findings of over 655,000 Iraqis killed (that was the summer 2006, the number is now past one million) was not only correct, the British government knew it was but lied and spun and attacked the study because the findings were uncomfortable for Tony Blair, the refugee crisis, the looting, the failure of the BBC and more:

Standing outside 10 Downing Street on 9 April 2003, the BBC's then political editor, Andrew Marr, reported the fall of Baghdad as a victory speech. Tony Blair, he told viewers, "said they would be able to take Baghdad without a bloodbath, and that in the end the Iraqis would be celebrating. And on both of those points he has been proved conclusively right. And it would be entirely ungracious, even for his critics, not to acknowledge that tonight he stands as a larger man and a stronger prime minister as a result." In the United States, similar travesties passed as journalism. The difference was that leading American journalists began to consider the consequences of the role they had played in the build-up to the invasion. Several told me they believed that had the media challenged and investigated Bush's and Blair's lies, instead of echoing and amplifying them, the invasion might not have happened. A European study found that, of the major western television networks, the BBC permitted less coverage of dissent than all of them. A second study found that the BBC consistently gave credence to government propaganda that weapons of mass destruction existed. Unlike the Sun, the BBC has credibility - as does, or did, the Observer.